企业社会责任英文原文加翻译

1、.一英文原文Moral Discourse and Corporate Social Responsibility ReportingBy MaryAnn Reynolds, Kristi YuthasABSTRACTThis paper examines voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting as a form of moral discourse. It explores how alternative stakeholder perspectives lead to differing perceptions

2、of the process and content of responsible reporting. We contrast traditional stakeholder theory, which views stakeholders as external parties having a social contract with corporations, with an emerging perspective, which views interaction among corporations and constituents as relational in nature.

3、 This moves the stakeholder from an external entity to one that is integral to corporate activity. We explore how these alternative stakeholder perspectives give rise to different normative demands for stakeholder engagement, managerial processes, and communication. We discuss models of CSR reportin

4、g and accountability: EMAS, the ISO 14000 series, SA8000, AA1000, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the Copenhagen Charter. We explore how these models relate to the stakeholder philosophies and find that they are largely consistent with the traditional atomistic view but fall far short of the de

5、mands for moral engagement prescribed by a relational stakeholder perspective. Adopting a relational view requires stakeholder engagement not only in prescribing reporting requiremenu, but also in discourse relating to core aspects of the corporation such as mission,values,and management systems, Ha

6、bermas' theory of communicative action provides guidelines for engaging stakeholders in this moral discourse.KEY WORDS: stakeholder engagement, stakeholder reporting, relational stakeholder perspective, corporate social responsibility,Theoryof Communicative Action,discourse ethicsIntroductionThr

7、oughout this paper, we use Habermas' theory of communicative action (1984, 1987, 1990) as a means through which to critique current approaches corporate the degree menu forsocial responsibility reporting in terms to which these reports embody require moral discourse. We provide a brief introduct

8、ion to key elements of the theory and ground it in social theory. We then discuss the details as they apply to CSR reporting.Our analysis is conducted in two stages, relying on different portions of Habermas' theory. In the first part, we examine the conditions that allow for basic communicative

9、 understanding. These conditions are the unspoken assumptions underlying communication. In normal communication, four basic universal assumptions are made: that the speaker is telling the truth, that he means what he says, and that what he says is appropriate in its context, and that it is understan

10、dable to the listener. In the first part of the paper, we show how models or frameworks for CSR reporting, taken together, address these assumptions and contribute to the effectiveness of CSR reports as a form of communication.In the second part of our analysis, we rely upon the ethical aspects of H

11、abermas' theory as a means through which to provide a normative critique of the body of CSR reporting frameworks. The theory of communicative action suggests that social progress can be accomplished through rational discourse under specific conditions. The discourse must be inclusive, democratic

12、, and free of power asymmetries. Apel (1980) has suggested that the ethical nature of an agreement derives from theprocess used to arrive at that agreement (rather than universal or externally-imposed ethical standards).We use Habermas' principles as a means to examine the extent to corporate co

13、mmunication is reflective of moral discourse.We find that while the frameworks generally promote stakeholder consultation,they fall short of providing other conditions needed for moral discourse. In particular, they fail to provide mechanisms that allow stakeholders with differing resources to parti

14、cipate democratically in discourse.The paper is organized as follows. First,we introduce social responsibility and corporate disclosure concepts related to CSRreporting.Next,we explore widely-used frameworks associated with corporate accountability in the CSR realm. Then, as noted above, we provide

15、a 2-part analysis of how concepts from Habermas' theory of communicative action are currently realized in guidance provided by CSR reporting models. We close with concluding rem arks.Background: social responsibility and corporate disclosureCorporate social responsibility is addressed in current

16、 business, accounting and ethics literature. The issue was widely discussed in the seventies and early eighties and then dropped out of sight. The current re-energized focus includes social, environmental and ethical reporting by corporations. The notion of corporate social disclosure arises from a

17、view of social theory which holds that the corporation owes a duty to the society; or has a social contract. One widely cited quotation comes from Shocker and Sethi (1974, p.67):"Any social institution一and business in no exception一operates in society via a social contract, expressed or implied,

18、 whereby its survival and growth are based on:1 .The delivery of some socially desirable ends to society in general and,2. The distribution of economic, social or political benefits to groups from which it derives its power.In a dnamic society, neither the sources of institutional power nor the need

19、s for its services are permanent. Therefore, an institution must constantly meet the twin tests of legitimacy and relevance by demonstrafing that society requires its services and that the groups benefiting from its rewards have society's approval."Carroll and Bucholtz offer a four part def

20、inition of corporate social responsibility, "The social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal,ethical, and discretionary (philanthropic) expectadons that society has of organizations at a given point in time (2006, p. 35)." This definition reflects current thinking on

21、corporate social responsibility and acknowledges the need to note shifts in social environment, these may be social, legal, or political.Corporate investors are questioning the adequacy of this communication approach and have called for increased reporting on issues of broad societal interest. Prese

22、ntly it is estimated that trillions of dollars are allocated to investments based on some social criteria (Sparkes and Cowton, 2004). Confulion may arise with the lack of comparable reporting.Implementable guidelines have consequently been developed by groups proposing models or frameworks for repor

23、ting (communicating) and auditing (verifying). Leading examples in order they were first issued are:EMAS (European, particularly German environmental management and audit) ISO 14001(Internationally recognized environmental management certification)SA 8000 (Social Accountability Internationallabor st

24、andard).AA1000 (International accountability assurante reporting standard).Copenhagen Charter(International standard involving stakeholder communications).GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) 2000 (International sustainability report).Models for corporate social responsibility reportingApproaches to so

25、cial and natural environmental accountability have been developed for various purposes. Classifying them under the umbrella of CSR reporting we will discuss some widely used models and introduce a less well-known model, which may provide additional benefit.Eco-Management and Audit Scheme ( EMAS, 199

26、5,2001)The European Commission set down the basic principles underlying the EMAS scheme in Council Regulation 1836/93 -EMAS of the European Commission. The purpose was improvement of environmental performance and was initially directed at manufacturing firms. This has since been extended to allow br

27、oad participation by any public or private entity wishing to participate. The regulation calls for an environmental statement from the entity and requires auditing.Further,there is a continual requirement to document ongoing continual improvement through the of implementation policies, programmes an

28、d management systems by a systematic, objective, and periodic evaluation of performance. There is also an obligation to inform the public of the results of the evaluation. The article on participation states that the scheme is open to public or private entities operating in the EU or the European Ec

29、onomic Area (EEA). The site may be registered if the site has an environmental policy, a site review, an environmental audit,objectives for continuous improvement, a statement from each site, verification covering poficy, programmes, the management system, the review and audit procedure, and the sta

30、tement provided. The validated environmental statement is then forwarded to the competent body in the Member State. The statement is also disseminated to the public after the registration of the site has been completed. The statement should be a concise, comprehensible description of activities at t

31、he site; with an assessment of significant relevant environmental issues, including: emissions, waste generation, consumption of raw materials, energy and water, noise and other significant aspects; a presentation of the company's environmental poficy, programme and management system at the site

32、, the deadline for the next statement, and the name of the accredited environmental verifier. The EMAS 2001 was strengthened by requiring ISO 14001 as the environmental management system.Council on Economic Priorities Accreditation Agency Social Accountability Standard (SA8000, 1998)/renamed Social

33、Accountability International (SAI)This standard has a change in focus and is concerned with fair labor practices world wide. It is divided into purpose and scope, normative elements and their interpretation, definitions,and social accountability requirements.The social accountability requirements in

34、clude: child labor,forced labor, health and safety, freedom of associanon and right to collective bargaining, discrimination, disciplinary practices, working hours,compensation, management systems, management review, company representatives,planning and implementation, control of suppliers, addressi

35、ng concerns and taking corrective action, outside communication, access for verification and records.Organizations choosing to adopt this standard are encouraged to require their suppliers to comply with its requirements also. This extends it widely into global society. Organizations can adopt these

36、 standards voluntarily and may disclose their tompliance with the provisions of the standard as part of other statements issued.Institute of Social and Ethical Accountability Standard AA1000 (1999)The first standard for building corporate accountability and trust was issued in November 1999 by the I

37、nstitute of Social and Ethical Accountability (ISEA).The ISEA states that the AA 1000 standard“provides both a framework that organizations can use to understand and improve their ethical performance and a means to judge the validity of ethical claims made." The AA1000 standard is described as:

38、an Accountability standard, focused on quality of social and ethical accounting,reporting. securing the auditing and reporting”AA1000 comprises principles (the characteristics of anquality process) and a set of process standards. Thebprocess standards cover planning, accounting,auditing and reportin

39、g, embedding, and stakeholder engagement (AA1000, 1999, p. 1).The focus is on improving overall performance through measurement, quality management, recruitment and retention of employees, external stakeholder engagement, partnership, risk management, investors, governance, government and regulatory

40、 relations and training (AA1000, 1999, pp. 3-4).Auditing and quality assurance are required as a part of the system. The users of AA1000 are expected to include adopting organizations, stakeholders, service providers, and standards developers. Thus we see the inclusion of societal stakeholders as co

41、nstituents.Concluding remarksIn this paper, we have adopted the relational view of stakeholders suggested by the theory of pragmatism.Under this perspective, CSR reporting becomes part of an ongoing discourse between a corporation and its stakeholders, rather than one-way communication about past pe

42、rformance. We use Habermas' theory of communicative action to provide guidance on how this discourse can be conducted in a manner that leads to morally justifiable outcomes. We examine how Habermasian principles are approximated in existing reporting models such as EMAS,ISO, SA 8000, AA 1000, an

43、d The Copenhagen Charter.The widespread voluntary adoption of various reporting models allows decision makers interested in social responsibility to evaluate corporations using this information in the context of a perceived social contract. The use of frameworks that approximate principles of communicative action allows investigation not only of reported outcomes, but also of the processes involved.Based on our examination of corporate social res